If you look on the Arduino blog section ( http://arduino.cc/blog/2012/11/26/kickstarter-trademarks-and-lies/ ) there is quite the sh#t storm over this kickstarter project and if it somehow violates the Arduino trademark or if any 'false claims' have been made about the project/product or not. Seems that lawyers have even been set forth to 'help resolve' the matter. I really hate to see this kind of 'disagreement' aired in public as it certainly goes against the goals and visions of open sourced hardware projects. The product series to me looks very interesting and certainly is new path/method of building arduino software compatible projects. I guess we will just have to wait to see if this storm passes or not.

I am not going to get in the storm, but I will state that the Arduino team's enforcement of trademark is at bets lax, they tend to pick and choose based on the buddy system, and thats frankly not right.

An example I like to point to is the operator of http://www.avr-developers.com, originally it had the Arduino name in the url, but very quickly after the trademark went into play they told him to change the domain, of a site that was giving away arduino core files for damn near every AVR out there, to the community for the community.

Meanwhile the Sparkfun Arduino Main board, which is a repackaged Uno, but points people to use their fourms, and claims a 2010 Sparkfun electronics copyright is just fine, because "we like sparkfun, and they have done a lot to help the community"

wizdum

I am not going to get in the storm, but I will state that the Arduino team's enforcement of trademark is at bets lax, they tend to pick and choose based on the buddy system, and thats frankly not right.

An example I like to point to is the operator of http://www.avr-developers.com, originally it had the Arduino name in the url, but very quickly after the trademark went into play they told him to change the domain, of a site that was giving away arduino core files for damn near every AVR out there, to the community for the community.

Meanwhile the Sparkfun Arduino Main board, which is a repackaged Uno, but points people to use their fourms, and claims a 2010 Sparkfun electronics copyright is just fine, because "we like sparkfun, and they have done a lot to help the community"

https://www.sparkfun.com/products/11023

Guess this guy just pissed someone off before they had their coffee

I think the issue here is more that these people are claiming to be something they are not. They used the Arduino name as a way to illegitimately gain credibility, rather than as a description of their product. This is not "a new product from the former Arduino's distributor", this is "a new product from two people that worked for a company that sold capacitors to an official Arduino distributor".

I have contracted out work to a friend of mine that does .Net developing. This would be like me hiring him for a new product, then putting "Check out NewThingHere from the Makers of Microsoft Windows!" to add credibility.

trademark is one of those things, defend it in all situations or dont defend it at all

the ONLY thing I see totally concrete is that they used ARDUINO (tm) on the board, thats a no no, and other than that everything else is a stretch on both sides. Not defending the guy, I personally think his story is 80% bunk, and if kickstarter actually did anything more than cash a check (I dont like kickstarter btw) the guy really should not be on the site in the first place... but the knee jerk reaction from Arduino to insta-post a grievance and ask the moron peanut gallery for opinions on the matter goes to show what kind of mentality backs this project.

honestly, great, they took wiring, processing, avr-gcc, made a crappy board slapped a name on it,trade-marked it, and if anyone happens to piss them off, and are not buddies then they will throw a fit like a 12 year on a COD forum.

I wont defend them as well.

Meanwhile a noobie trap like sparkfun will continue selling "Sparkfun Arduino Main Boards" (in writing in 2 places on the packaging and a trademark) for a third year, and this guy gets papers.

I always assumed that SparkFun and Arduino had a more official relationship than just an "understanding", well beyond SF being a official distributor of real Arduinos, and probably involving royalties for their "Arduino Pro" series.(The actual existence, and details, of such business arrangements would/could be private, of course.) Adafruit also has some sort of official agreement over their "BoArduino" products, IIRC.

dhenry

Other than the "ARDUINO" mark on the pcb, I don't think the smARtDUINO guys made any mistake: their statements of having worked on the manufacturing of ARDUINO is true - I am sure when compelled by a court, ARDUINO would have to confirm that.

And assessing damages is even more interesting: a legal fight would force ARDUINO to open up its books. If ARDUINO made a lot of money, well, that will intensify competition here and raise a few eyebrows; If ARDUINO didn't make a lot of money, well, no damage.

I have to admit my post wasn't as clear as I wanted it to be. I was trying to convey two different messages and it created a certain amount of confusion.

First of all Arduino hasn't sued anybody and doesn't plan to do so. I want to reiterate that Kickstarter is amazing and they are a fundamental element of the community. We are now in direct communication with them and we can discuss issues directly should they arise.

As it has been already mentioned, we are fairly relaxed about the use of the name, we intervene only when we have proof that people are getting confused. (I get a fairly regular stream of emails from different people asking things like "I bought X from this website and I thought it was an Arduino product but then it didn't work properly and now how do I get my money back?" or "Is company Y related to you guys because they claim that they worked with you on product Z ")

Sparkfun has a license on the name for the Pro and Lilypad boards. If you see it used in other places please let me know directly. They are getting big and mistakes can happen.

I've written to a number of people on kickstarter, ebay, amazon, and more to ask them to follow the rules contained in the Trademark Policy. Some of them reply and comply, some don't and it requires us to send them a more official piece of communication. Trademarks are complex and IANAL but we have to take certain steps when specific situations arise to prove that we defend it or we risk losing it. We also have to be careful with dilution: "Under trademark law, dilution occurs either when unauthorized use of a mark "blurs" the "distinctive nature of the mark" or "tarnishes it." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark )

It ain't funny... But we have never objected to people who created products based on Arduino who were very clear about who they were and what were the differences between

In the specific case our contract manufacturer in Italy doesn't agree that the people behind the kicstarter were actual manufacturers but they say they have been, at some point, a sub-sub-contractor. From our side the only thing we can say is that the only company that has ever had a contract to make official Arduino boards in Italy is SmartProjects ltd (you can see their name on the small leaflet inside each box). When SP received a mail from one of their main clients asking if they were behind the fundraising, they got a bit nervous. The fact that the name chosen for the product is somehow a combination of SmartProjects and Arduino increased the confusion.It's something they have figure out between themselves.

The main message I was trying to convey is that on Kickstarter there are many projects "riding" the Arduino name to promote their product, we understand that, but there are situations where the project creator goes a bit far and a certain amount of confusion ensues. I was asking for the possibility to involve Kickstarter in the communication so that we can mediate. As I said I'm pleased we have a direct contact with their co-founder and we look forward working with them.

I hope I shed some light on the situation. I'm happy to answers any questions you guys might have.

@Osgeld I respectfully disagree with the statement that we "throw a fit like a 12 year on a COD forum."

Actually we've had multiple people complain about the fact that we don't write enough about what we do and what we think.For sure we haven't really complained loudly in public about anything. If we did, please remind me because I can't think of any example now.

This statement (if made by the two people who supposedly worked for the contractor) may be technically correct but it is misleading, I know they clarify later on but I don't think it can be viewed any other way.

As was stated by someone on the blog (I paraphrase), you don't pull a couple of Ford assembly workers of the line and and employ them so you can say "For years we manufactured Broncos".

dhenry

This statement (if made by the two people who supposedly worked for the contractor) may be technically correct but it is misleading,

Is this one of those "true but false" thing?

In a court of law, are you required to tell the truth or are you required to not mislead?

Misleading or not is a perception (by others). As long as they provided the facts, they are done. How the facts are to be perceived by others is out of their control and it wouldn't be fair to hold them accountable for things they have no control over.

In a court of law, are you required to tell the truth or are you required to not mislead?

Technically I suppose you are required to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. There's no mention of "misleading" AFAIK, although I've never been in cour...Oh there was that one time.

But as we all know the exact same sentence can have vastly different meaning through simple things like context or even just the angel of your eye brows as you speak.